Dom Capers

I agree with most of that except:

 

The 12 point lead is only because the defense pitched a shutout. It is NOT a stat that proves the offense was doing well.

 

19 points is well below what the offense should have scored up to that point.

I understand what you mean because they had opportunities, but were talking about a D that was only allowing 15 points a game to that point. There's a reason they were only allowing 15 points.

Need to score more than six points off five turnovers. Really no more complicated than that.

Capers was naked and ready to jump into bed with a bunch of super models.  Instead of the dream orgy, he blew it early, tripped and fell to ground and got arse raped by carrol with a big blue dildo.

GB should have turned one of those first two TO's into 7. No question. Not enough being made of Daniel's boneheaded 15 yard penalty after Ha Ha's first pick. 

 

The other 3 turnovers.

 

AR threw a pick 3 plays after Ha Ha's second INT. That's on AR. Would have been a punt if that pass went incomplete anyways.

Shields INT was a touchback at the end of the half.

Burrnett's pick. I don't even want to go there. 

 

I've heard the "need more than 6 points on 5 turnovers" a lot. Really. The argument is "needed more than 6 points off the first two turnovers". Daniel's should have kept his hole shut. Ball was on the 4 yard line. 

They don't average allowing 15 points when the other team forces 5 turnovers.

 

That was anything but an average game for the Seahawks.

 

Packer offense should have rolled in that one.

Ball was on the 4 yard line.

With GB's offense, are the odds really that much better scoring from the 4 versus the 19? Not excusing Daniel's, but I believe GB's RZ troubles have been more from inside the 10 than from the 10-20 this year.

 

Oh yeah. I didn't realize this until yesterday, but one writer pointed out that Daniels wasn't even in the game on that play, and ran 20-30 yards down the sideline to taunt Sweezy or whoever it was. 

 

Really? I can maybe see a guy caught up in the play running down and doing that but when you're not even in the game? Beyond stupid.

I had the same thought after the penalty.  Maybe they have a better shot from here!  But then they wind up back inside the 5 and kick.

I don't think anyone is gonna say that the offense "played well", I'm not.  But, they scored an amount points that in combination with the defense to that point, enabled a 12 point lead with 3:52 to go.  If the offense scored 42, but they still only had a 12 point lead and the same exact things happen, does it change anything?  Defense still gave away a 12 point lead, which should be more than enough with 3:52 left, regardless if that 12 point lead was 42-30 or 19-7.

 

I'm not saying the offense was great.  If you want to argue "we should have had more than a 12 point lead" I agree 100%.

 

My main point is that every unit is to blame, my secondary point is the defense was a hugeh part of the blame, as regardless if the score was 19-7 or 42-30 they gave up a 12 point lead in 2 minutes and 27 seconds.  

quote:

I hope he is not another Peyton.....Mr October

AR is currently 6-5 in the playoffs.  Peyton Manning is 11-13.

Yeah, he hit the clutch ones. Rodgers missed on all his deep throws. BTW, not discounting the one-legged thing. Just an observation.

Yes, penalty was stupid but what people fail to mention is that we got a first down on the first play from the 19 & had it first & goal from the 7....so really his penalty only cost us 3 yards. Seriously doubt it made any difference. 

THIS!!!

quote:

Daniel's should have kept his hole shut. Ball was on the 4 yard line.

And yet the Packers got the ball inside the 4 on that drive anyway.

CAPF95, even before the 3:52 left the offense had the ball and did nothing with it. The offense went prevent on the previous possession even before the Burnett INT. By the time the defense got back out there at the 3:52 mark, the offense did nothing to secure the game.

 

The defense shoulda, woulda, coulda kept the lead just as much as the offense shoulda, woulda, coulda kept or extended the lead/sealed the game.  The 4 minute offense is who they've been this year. 

I still think the Packers defense is better with a change at DC.  They have not been great, even if they improved some in the second half of 2014, and I feel a new voice, new message will give the defense new focus next year.  I really think the past 4 years have shown that the game is passing Dom by.  Rankings of  32, 11, 25, 15 are not what I think of when I think of a team that feels it should be a contender.

 

I know he was a flop as HC in Detroit, but Jim Schwartz is a heck of a DC.  He had a great defense in Buffalo this year.  I think he's worth a look.  He is available, no strings attached.  The next place I would shop to replace Dom is Seattle.  Ken Norton, Jr. and Rocky Seto are both intriguing, though I am unsure if Carroll would let them interview.

           

 

Look, I'm not in any way, shape, or form, arguing that the offense missed a bunch of opportunities.  I'm not arguing that those 2 3 and outs were brutal.  I'm not arguing that the offense shouldn't have scored more than 19 points to that point.

 

All I'm saying is that the defense was handed a situation that I would expect any NFL defense to be able to manage.  A defense should be able to protect a 12 point lead with under 4 minutes left.

 

I'm not solely blaming the defense.  I've repeatedly stated this loss is on everyone.  

 

Just as we can all agree the offense should have scored more, I contend we should all agree that any defense should have protected a 12 point lead with under 4 to go.

 

/still blames Sterling Sharpe for all of this.

Well said. 

 

And how about not giving up a TD on the first drive of OT?

And I'm not solely blaming the offense. And I agree, this all Sterling Sharpe's fault.

 

 

The offense tied their shoes together. I'm telling you, the offense is soley to blame.

You forgot to include that the guy is a complete dick.

BUF's D was emerging before Schwartz got there.

 

SEA runs a 4-3.  Are we really rehashing that argument (switching to a 4-3) again?  To top that, I'm thinking any D coord is going to look better with Bennett, Avril, Irvin, Wagner, Sherman, Chancellor and Thomas.

Dom is a nice guy

Or that he and MM probably don't get along.

Without 2 ST screw ups we leave Seattle with a 19-15 win, period. If Ryan doesn't run for the 1st or Hawk knocks down the pass then GB gets the ball back around where they got in from the kickoff, but WITH the momentum. Seattle got the ball back on their own 45 with 1:55 on the clock and 1 TO. If Bostick blocks (like he was supposed to) and Nelson catches that ball then GB could have conceivably run down the clock and punted from around the 50 with 10 seconds left. A punt hangs for 3 or 4 seconds so realistically Seattle would have had maybe 6 or 7 seconds to run a play from deep in their own territory. Even with their luck I seriously doubt they could have made that happen. 

 

There are 1000 things we could dissect and second guess, but 2 simple lapses in judgement blew up the whole thing. Our offense and defense battled their butts off against the best team in the league and it came down to 2 special teams gaffes. 

That is a fair analysis. 

I guess some part of me is OK expecting the defense to hold a 12 point lead.  Not doing so would be contributing to the loss.  

 

I can also reconcile that this isn't and excuse for the offense or special teams.  

Agree with you, GD. To me the fake FG was the key play and the most inexcusable. Packers were completely unprepared, both schematically and in-the-moment, and the players on the field showed it.

 

Seattle had been totally on the ropes and if that play failed it would have sucked even more life from the stadium and the opponent. As much as any team Seattle feeds on 2nd half momentum and that was the first realized sliver of light they'd seen. I'm sure Seattle would have made a second-half run at some point but to just hand them the keys to their ignition in that fashion is incomprehensible.

 

Slocum, MM, and the players not looking for a fake is perhaps the most brutal demonstration of incompetence I've ever seen in a playoff game.

A 12 point lead isn't a huge lead to hold when you're facing a big play offense like Seattle.

Not for a Dom Capers defense, that's for sure.

 

/you put it right on the tee...

More sadness....

 

I called the fake. I kept screaming at the TV...."WATCH THE FAKE!!" I mean c'mon....if I can sit on a couch & call this $hit out, how in the **** is it not obvious to our coaches to at least play back a little instead of "crashing down & going for the block" 

 

Seriously....It's a complete joke

With all the monumental f ups, and there were at least 7-8 of them, if Morgan Burnett doesn't choke and slide the Packers win. No question about it. 

 

That at was an all time choke on his part. 

Or if a tight end (even tho it was not for him to do) catches the ball......Raji, Fridge, Watt or Peppers can catch it.  I catch that ball, you catch that ball.  There is no excuse for not catching that ball.

Seattle got the ball back at 2:07, and actually ran two runs for 18 yards before the two minute warning. 

 

Had the Packers recovered the ball and not converted a first down, the Seahawks likely get the ball back with 1 minute to play, somewhere around the 15- 20 with a halfway decent punt.

With all the money teams spent on coaches, maybe the Packers should spend a few bucks and hire a couple of seasoned veteran coaches whose only job is to "self-scout" the Packers every week and pick up tendencies and weaknesses.   For example, if the Brad Jones error jumps out at the Seahawks, one would think that it was obvious and would be caught in a self-scout.  The coaches on the team have their hands full with game planning, etc, and as far as I know, the only team MM mentions they "self-scout" is in the bye week during the season.

Didn't MM use Raji as a fullback a few times in prior years?  I wish they would have had a play with Giuon or Daniels at fullback and plow a hole large enough for Lacy to squeeze thru.  Maybe 14 or at least 10 - 0 instead of 6-0. 

Okay I was 10 seconds off. GB could have blown at least 90 seconds off the clock, if not more. If GB doesn't convert the first then Seattle, at best, would get the ball back with 30 seconds from deep in their own territory. Even with their luck I find it hard to believe they would have gotten a TD.

For any of you guys that want to consider Schwartz as our DC, consider this...

It's not that he teaches players how to play dirty, it's that he allows  them to. I don't want an undisciplined coach within 50 feet of my team.

Schwartz largely inherited his defenses in Detoilet and Buffalo. It's hard to argue with the results, but I don't think he was particularly creative or innovative.

Posted by Slowmo:

 

"Had the Packers recovered the ball and not converted a first down, the Seahawks likely get the ball back with 1 minute to play, somewhere around the 15- 20 with a halfway decent punt"

 

The question here is what does MM do differently protecting a 1 possession lead. I think he get's more aggressive to keep the ball and kill the game. But that's just wild ass speculation.